A divided appeals court panel overturned a contempt finding against the Trump administration regarding deportations to an El Salvador prison, deeming the lower court judge had overstepped his authority. The decision followed the arrival of Venezuelan migrants at the prison despite a judge’s order for their return to the U.S. The majority opinion, written by judges nominated by Trump, argued the lower court intruded on executive branch foreign affairs powers. This ruling came after the Attorney General celebrated the win on social media.
Read More
A federal judge is considering holding the Trump administration in criminal contempt of court for defying a court order prohibiting the deportation of Asian immigrants to war-torn South Sudan. Two immigrants were deported to South Sudan despite the order, with the Department of Justice attributing the action to a “misunderstanding.” The judge also expressed serious concerns about the false testimony regarding the deportation of a Guatemalan immigrant to Mexico, suggesting potential perjury charges. The judge warned that individuals at all levels of the relevant agencies could face contempt charges. The White House, in response, labeled the judge a “far-left activist.”
Read More
Judge Paula Xinis ruled that the Trump administration is not acting in good faith regarding the expedited return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia from El Salvador, citing intentional noncompliance with discovery requests. The judge sharply criticized the Justice Department’s use of vague privilege claims to obstruct the process, ordering them to provide specific legal and factual justifications. This follows complaints from Abrego Garcia’s attorneys about insufficient responses and inadequate document production from the government. The Department of Homeland Security’s top lawyer was deposed, and the administration submitted a sealed daily update for in-camera review by the judge.
Read More
Senator Amy Klobuchar warned of an impending constitutional crisis, but believes that a functioning judiciary, engaged citizenry, and a resistant Congress are preventing it. She urged the Supreme Court to hold Trump administration officials in contempt for defying a court order regarding the wrongful deportation of a Maryland resident. This follows Justice Alito’s dissenting opinion on a Supreme Court decision blocking further Venezuelan deportations, criticizing the majority’s late-night ruling as procedurally flawed and lacking sufficient explanation. Alito argued the court lacked jurisdiction and failed to consider the government’s perspective before issuing the order.
Read More
Judge Boasberg’s decision to initiate contempt proceedings against the Trump administration stems from a blatant disregard for a court order. The judge’s actions are a direct response to the administration’s defiance of legal mandates, underscoring a significant clash between the judicial and executive branches. This isn’t simply a procedural matter; it speaks to the very core principles of the rule of law and accountability within the American system of governance.
This isn’t the first time the Trump administration has faced accusations of flouting judicial decisions. The consistent pattern of disregard for court orders raises serious concerns about the administration’s commitment to upholding the legal framework that governs the nation.… Continue reading
Judge James Boasberg held the Trump administration in criminal contempt for defying his orders to halt the deportation of over 130 Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador without due process. The judge found sufficient evidence of “willful disregard” for his March directives, despite the administration’s claims of state secrets and lack of knowledge regarding the flights’ execution. Boasberg offered the administration options to avoid further contempt proceedings, including asserting custody of the deported migrants or identifying the officials responsible for the decision. He emphasized the foundational “rule of law” demanding compliance with court orders, irrespective of official position or claimed justification. Failure to comply could result in criminal contempt charges, prosecuted either by the Justice Department or an appointed outside attorney.
Read More
Senator Chuck Grassley faced intense constituent criticism at a town hall meeting regarding the Trump administration’s defiance of a Supreme Court order to facilitate the return of a wrongly deported Maryland man, Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Angry citizens directly questioned Grassley’s inaction, drawing parallels between the administration’s disregard for the court order and potential consequences for ordinary citizens. Grassley defended his inaction, claiming it was beyond Congress’s power, despite the administration’s financial contribution to Abrego Garcia’s imprisonment in El Salvador. Further complaints focused on Trump-era policies, including immigration, tariffs, and budget cuts impacting social security. A judge has since ordered government officials to testify and will determine whether contempt of court occurred.
Read More
Federal Judge Paula Xinis sharply criticized the Trump administration for its handling of Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s deportation, accusing them of ignoring court orders and obstructing justice. The administration defiantly claimed that even if returned, Abrego Garcia would be immediately re-deported due to alleged MS-13 ties, despite accusations of misinterpreting court orders to “facilitate” his return. Judge Xinis rejected the administration’s arguments, ordering two weeks of intensive discovery and emphasizing the urgency of Abrego Garcia’s situation, highlighting the daily harm to him and his family. The judge’s rebuke follows the Supreme Court’s upholding of her previous order mandating the administration facilitate Abrego Garcia’s release from a Salvadoran prison. The administration’s actions have been met with outrage from Abrego Garcia’s wife and widespread protest.
Read More
Federal Judge Paula Xinis sharply criticized the Trump administration for its inaction in returning Kilmar Ábrego García, a Salvadoran national wrongly deported to El Salvador, giving officials two weeks to provide evidence of their efforts. The judge threatened contempt of court charges if the administration fails to demonstrate good faith, demanding sworn testimony from four Homeland Security officials. While the Supreme Court ordered the administration to facilitate Mr. Ábrego García’s return, the government’s actions, including conflicting statements about his potential re-entry, raise concerns about compliance. The case highlights a broader conflict between the judicial and executive branches regarding deportation policy and the Trump administration’s handling of the situation.
Read More
Lawyers representing a wrongly deported man are requesting a U.S. contempt hearing against those responsible for his disappearance. The situation highlights a blatant disregard for judicial orders and raises serious concerns about the well-being of the deported individual. The judge’s initial inquiry focused on the man’s whereabouts, the steps taken to secure his return, and the planned future actions. However, the lawyers’ response only addressed the first question, leaving the crucial questions of their efforts and future plans unanswered. This omission represents a clear defiance of a direct court order, further escalating the already serious situation.
This lack of cooperation isn’t just a procedural oversight; it signals a dangerous pattern of behavior.… Continue reading
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood